Case Summary
Innomed Healthcare Pvt. Ltd. filed a suit against P.V. Preetha for recovery of Rs. 7,17,600 due for a Fuji computed radiography system and related products. The plaintiff claims the defendant failed to make payment despite assurances.
Judgment Outcome
Judgment Favored
Plaintiff
Relief Granted
Plaintiff is entitled to realize an amount of Rs. 7,17,600 with interest @ 12% per annum and costs of the proceedings.
Case Type
Civil Suit
Final Judgment
No
The court ruled in favor of the plaintiff, stating that the defendant is liable to pay the amount due including interest. Therefore, the suit is decreed accordingly.
Why Plaintiff Won:
The plaintiff successfully established that the defendant failed to make payment for the purchased products.
The plaintiff successfully established that the defendant failed to make payment for the purchased products.
Losing Side's Weaknesses:
The plaintiff successfully established that the defendant failed to make payment for the purchased products.
The plaintiff successfully established that the defendant failed to make payment for the purchased products.
Supporting Evidence
Evidence and pleadings of plaintiff herein would show that PW1 is the managing director of plaintiff company. The facts of the case in hand are similar to that of United Bank of India v Sh Naresh Kumar & Ors. PW1 has categorically denied that he is not competent to represent the company.
Judgment Evidence:
In the result, suit is decreed on the following terms. Plaintiff is entitled to realize an amount of Rs. 7,17,600 with interest @ 12% per annum from the date of suit till decree and thereafter @ 6% per annum till realization.
Parties Involved
Parties
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Party Name
- Innomed Healthcare Pvt. Ltd.
- Relation
- Represented by
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- P.V. Preetha
- Party Age
- 48
Plaintiffs Documents
Quotation issued by Fuji Film, purchase order, customer application form, invoices, lawyers notice.
Defendants Documents
Advocates
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- Sanish.C.R.
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Advocate Name
- A.T. Anilkumar (Anil Mamala)
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Advocate Name
- Krishob.K. Nair
- Appearance Type
- Assisting Counsel
Reliefs
Relief Type:
Recovery
Outcome:
Granted
Description:
Plaintiff is entitled to realize an amount of Rs. 7,17,600 with interest @ 12% per annum from the date of suit till decree.
Evidence:
In the result, suit is decreed on the following terms. Plaintiff is entitled to realize an amount of Rs. 7,17,600 (Rupees Seven Lakhs seventeen Thousand six hundred only) with interest @ 12% per annum from the date of suit till decree and thereafter @ 6% per annum till realization.
Relief Type:
Cost
Outcome:
Granted
Description:
Plaintiff is entitled to realize the costs of the proceedings from the defendant.
Evidence:
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case plaintiff is entitled for the costs of the proceeding from defendant.
Documents & Evidence
Document Type:
Quotation
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
It was issued by Fuji Film India Pvt. Ltd. to the defendant regarding the price of the Fuji computed radiography system.
Reference:
Ext.A1
Document Type:
Purchase Order
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
It was placed by the defendant for the Fuji computed radiography system.
Reference:
Ext.A2
Document Type:
Customer application form
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
It was submitted by the defendant to the plaintiff for the purchase of the CR system.
Reference:
Ext.A3
Document Type:
Invoices
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
These are copies of invoices issued to the defendant for the sale of the Fuji computed radiography system and X-ray films.
Reference:
Exts.A4 to Exts.A7
Document Type:
Letter
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
It is a letter issued by the plaintiff to the defendant requesting payment.
Reference:
Ext.A8
Document Type:
Lawyers notice
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
It is a lawyers notice issued to the defendant regarding the outstanding dues.
Reference:
Ext.A9
Document Type:
A/d Card
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
It confirms the receipt of the aforementioned lawyers notice by the defendant.
Reference:
Ext.A10
Document Type:
Complaint
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
These are copies of the complaint filed before the SHO, Palarivattom.
Reference:
Ext.A11 to Ext.A13
Document Type:
Oral Evidence
Submitted By:
Unknown
Relevance:
This includes the oral evidence of PW1, which was presented in the court.
Reference:
Case Classification
Case Type
Civil Suit
Category
Money and Loan Recovery
District
Ernakulam
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiff Court, Ernakulam
Common Reasons
Non-payment of rent
Case Code
Case between Innomed Healthcare Pvt. Ltd. vs P.V. Preetha regarding realization of money
Case Code Year
Case between Innomed Healthcare Pvt. Ltd. vs P.V. Preetha regarding realization of money